[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Another feather theory
On Mon, May 24th, 2010 at 12:50 PM, "Richard W. Travsky" <rtravsky@uwyo.edu>
wrote:
> A reader's letter in the May 22nd Science News suggests the following
>
> (paraphrased) in regards to a Sid Perkins article on feather
> development:
>
> When foxes and dogs try to catch chickens they get a mouth (or paw)
> full
> of feathers. So, the feathers make for a fluffy target and aid in the
> feathered one's escape.
>
> I could see that might be an aid smaller birds but possibly not
> larger ones.
A 'feathery lure' would only evolve if it allowed the prey animal to escape
often enough to justify
such biologically expensive structures. You'd also expect very early feathered
theropods to have
quickly reduced the length of the bony tail while replacing it with
increasingly elongated feathers, if
feathers originally evolved as detachable lures. Perhaps there's a case for
arguing such a strategy
for Nomingia.
I see many suburban birds flying around quite well (albeit with less agility)
without tail feathers,
after a close encounter with a neighbourhood cat. However losing a few feathers
is far less
traumatic than losing feathers and a few distal vertebrae, as would have
happened with early long-
tailed (and initially short-feathered) theropods.
--
_____________________________________________________________
Dann Pigdon
GIS Specialist Australian Dinosaurs
Melbourne, Australia http://home.alphalink.com.au/~dannj
_____________________________________________________________